North Carolina Department of Agriculture
James A. Graham, Commisskmer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
King Tobacco and the Soaring Sixties 4
Canadian Leaf Marketing 8
North Carolina Flue-Cured Crops, 1919-1969 13
State Marketing Summary, 1969-1970 14
North Carolina Tobacco Warehouse Sales Report, 1369-1970 16
Summary of Dealer and Warehouse Resales, 1969 18
Producer and Gross Sales of Flue Cured Tobacco by States, 1969 18
Flue-Cured Movement In and Out of North Carolina 19
Burley Movement In and Out of North Carolina 19
Stabilization Receipts by Belts, 1969 20
North Carolina Burley Tobacco Allotments, 1970 21
North Carolina Flue-Cured Tobacco Allotments, 1970 22
North Carolina Burley Crops, 1928-1969 24
North Carolina Tobacco Warehouses and Operators
By Belts and Markets, 1969 26
Domestic Cigarette Consumption By Kinds, 1969 Back Cover
For free distribution by the Tobacco Section,
Markets Division, North Carolina Department
of Agriculture, Raleigh, N. C.
Curtis F. Tarleton, Director, Division of Markets
J. H. Cyrus. In Charge, Tobacco Marketing Section
J. T. Bunn, Tobacco Marketing Specialist
The twenty-first annual is-
sue of the North Carolina
Tobacco Report has been pre-
pared under the direction of
J. H. Cyrus, in charge of the
Tobacco Marketing Section,
Division of Markets, North
Carolina Department of Agri-
The annual publication con-
tains a wealth of information
pertaining to market statistics
and the current tobacco situa-
tion along with other data
which is of interest through-
out the tobacco industry. Some
of the data in this publication
was made possible through the
long standing cooperation and
good relationship which is maintained between the various State
and Federal agencies and other segments of the tobacco industry.
As usual, recognition is given the Cooperative Crop Report-
ing Service, the Agricultural Stabilization Conservation Service,
the Flue-Cured Tobacco Cooperative Stabilization Corporation
and the U. S. Tobacco Division, Consumer and Marketing Service
for their contribution to this issue.
The cover picture shows the Canadian Dutch Auction Clock
in operation. This issue also includes a feature article by J. H.
Cyrus describing the Canadian marketing system and functions
of the Marketing Board as observed by Mr. Cyrus and Curtis F.
Tarleton, Director of the Division of Markets, North Carolina
Department of Agriculture, during a visit to the Canadian
markets following the opening of their 1969-70 marketing season.
This article emphasizes some of the efficiencies of the Canadian
marketing system that should be of interest to all segments of
our flue-cured industry.
Commissioner of Agriculture
King Tobacco and the Soaring Sixties-
Shows Hope for the Seventies
Tobacco came through the ravaging attacks of the soaring
sixties a httle battle scarred but still king of the Tarheel economy.
Tobacco still accounts for the largest share of the total farm in-
come in North Carolina. However, during the sixties, increases
in cash returns from several other crops, livestock and livestock
products did reduce tobacco's share of the total farm income in
North Carolina from approximately 50 percent in the early sixties
to its present level of around 40 per cent of the total cash farm
The average flue-cured production and volume of sales show-
ed a decline during the last half of the sixties due to tighter
controls under the acreage-poundage program. However, Tarheel
farmers' gross income from tobacco has been maintained at
slightly more than one-half billion dollars annually throughout
the decade. This was possible through a gradual increase in the
prices paid farmers, which rose from an average of 57.9 cents
per pound in 1960 to a record average of 72 cents in 1969.
North Carolina flue-cured growers received $502 million for
697 million pounds of tobacco sold in 1969. The average gross
income for Tarheel flue-cured growers during the last decade
was $509 million from an average production of 800 million
North Carolina burley growers received $13.3 million from
their 1969 crop of 19 million pounds. This is about the same as the
last ten years' average production and gross receipts of burley
History will record the sixties as a decade of unparalleled
progress for the domestic tobacco industry. At the same time,
it experienced some of the most severe attacks in history by anti-
tobacco zealots who would destroy this great heritage.
Despite these smear tactics of anti-tobacco forces and ex-
orbitant taxation by state and local governments, the cigarette
industry rounded out the sixties holding its own near the peak
level it had risen to during the decade. For instance, total cig-
arette output rose from 506 6 billion in 1960 to an all-time record
high of 579.9 bilhon cigarettes in 1968. It now appears that the
output of all cigarettes during 1969 was maintained at a level
just slightly less than the record of the previous year.
It is interesting to note that while United States consump-
tion of cigarettes declined an estimated 2 percent in 1969, world
consumption outside the United States increased approximately
5 percent. Thus, it appears that the United States is about the
only place in the world where cigarette consumption is currently
The sixties brought forth many changes and technological
advances throughout the tobacco industry. Probably one of the
most significant changes was the complete shift from the market-
ing of tied to untied flue-cured tobacco between the years of
1962 and 1968, and the implementing of a pre-sheeting system to
improve the efficiency of handling loose leaf tobacco. While many
buying companies did not look upon loose leaf sales as an ad-
vancement in the market, it did serve a real purpose in helping
farmers overcome labor shortages and cut their cost of handling.
The major technological advancements in the tobacco in-
dustry during the sixties were in the areas of leaf processing
and cigarette manufacturing. For instance, technology led cigar-
ette manufacturers to large-scale use of the reconstituted tobacco
process which permits more complete utilization of the entire
leaf, including stems and small particles that previously could
not to be used in cigarettes. At the same time, new cigarette filters
were being developed which led to a continuous rise in filter
tip cigarette output during the last decade, from 52 percent in
1960 to 78 percent in 1969. Then, as the decade of the sixties
came to an end, technology wrought new processes of fluffing
tobacco to increase its cigarette filling capacity.
The result of these advances in processing and manufactur-
ing, coupled with the use of more imported tobacco in cigarette
blends, has been a pronounced decline in the amount of flue-cured
tobacco used in cigarette manufacture. For instance, the amount
of flue-cured tobacco used in the blend of the total U. S. cig-
arette output has declined from 731 million pounds in 1960 to
652 million pounds in 1968. In other words, the use of flue-cured
tobacco dropped about 13 percent between 1960 and 1968, while
cigarette production increased 14 percent during the same period.
From these figures it appears on the surface that the new-
technology apphed in processing and manufacturing has been an
economic advance only to the manufacturers. However, a look
beneath the surface shows that, through the application of new
technology, makers of cigarettes were able to hold their manu-
facturers' prices to a minimal level while improving the product
to meet the consumer's preference. So there is no doubt that these
technological advances in the industry have helped to maintain
and, in many instances, actually increased the demand for cig-
arettes. Therefore, as cigarette manufacturers continue to apply
new technology to make their product more economical to the
consumer and at the same time improve their product so as to
meet the current outside pressures and consumers' changing de-
mands, the long range effect will likely be future gains in cig-
arette consumption. Thus, in the long run, the advances in tech-
nology experienced during the sixties and their continuation in-
to the new decade will have the effect of maintaining or possibly
increasing the market demand for the farmers' tobacco produc-
tion during the seventies.
The average exports of flue-cured and hurley tobacco reach-
ed a record level during the sixties. Exports of flue-cured tobacco
from 1960 to 1969 averaged 492 million pounds per year compared
to an average of 452 million pounds per year during the previous
decade. During the last four years of the decade — 1966-69 — flue-
cured exports soared to record levels averaging 542 million
pounds per year. The exports of hurley tobacco increased by
more than one-third during the sixties, reaching a peak level of
57 million pounds, with average exports of 47 million pounds
per year throughout the decade.
The New Decade
In the new decade of the seventies, tobacco will continue to
play an important role in the American way of life with con-
sumers spending more than $10 million annually for tobacco
products. It is very likely that with the emphasis now being
placed on research and pollution, the truth will break through
during this decade to relieve the pressures that have built up
concerning smoking and health. This would allow sales of cig-
arettes to return to their normal rate of growth in a growing
In North Carolina tobacco will continue to be the leading
contributor to the agricultural economy and a major factor in
the industrial economy of this state during the seventies. Tarheel
flue-cured and burley tobacco growers will continue to receive
slightly more than one-half bilhon dollars annually from the
sale of their crops. During the decade ahead tobacco farm mech-
anization will be the intervening factor to reverse the farmers'
Cigarette output which has currently leveled off will likely
stabilize near the current level during the early years of the new
decade before starting a slow move upward again.
The greatest challenge to all segments of the tobacco indus-
try during this decade is to maintain its unity of efforts to
strengthen the traditional positive image of tobacco and its use.
Canadian Leaf Market Interesting
By J. H. Cyrus, In Charge
Tobacco Marketing Section
N. C. Department of Agriculture
A visit to the Ontario, Canada, flue-cured tobacco markets
at Tillsonburg, Delhi, and Aylmer provides one with a liberal
education in efficiency in marketing.
Out of the despair and frustrations experienced by Ontario
tobacco farmers in disposing of their crops to buyers making an
offer to them at the barn door on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, the
Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing System was
born in 1957. The system is a farmer-owned, non-profit corpora-
tion estabhshed under the Farm Products Marketing Act of On-
The marketing system is operated and controlled by the On-
tario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers Marketing Board, which con-
sists of 15 members.
Of these, 14 are elected by growers in the 14 designated dis-
tricts and one share-grower member is appointed by the elected
Authority Of Board
The marketing board has complete control over all phases of
the production and marketing of flue-cured tobacco in the On-
tario Province, under authority granted by the Farm Products
One of the first functions of the board before the beginning
of a new crop year is to sit down in conference with representa-
tives of the buying trade to determine the volume of tobacco
needed to supply market demand.
After the needed supply has been projected and firm com-
mitments are obtained from the domestic and export trade, the
marketing board then establishes the current quota for each of
the 4,500 licensed producers. This is done by adjusting the grow-
er's permanently assigned base quota either up or down by a
The 1969 quota, which averaged about 34 acres per grower,
was established at 23 percent below the base quota. Average
yields would have resulted in production of about 200 million
pounds, the volume for which the marketing board had com-
mitments. However, most growers produced record yields this
year and the current crop estimate is 220 million pounds.
Checking For MH-30
There is no provision for price supports in the Ontario mar-
keting system. The extra 20 million pounds expected to be sold
this year are currently causing a slight decline in most grade
prices compared with 1968 prices.
After quotas have been established early in each year, the
marketing board is then responsible for measuring planted
acreage of individual producers; spot-checking for MH-30 sucker
control chemical, which cannot legally be used in Canada; es-
timating size of production by taking sample weights in each
grower's packhouse; and for making a further check of the num-
ber of tobacco bales a grower has in his packhouse after he noti-
fies the board that a portion of his crop is ready for sale.
The marketing board keeps a complete record on file of all
these operations on each grower, including marketing records
which are computerized.
The marketing board operates three auction exchanges. They
are located at Tillsonburg, Delhi, and Aylmer. Activities are
coordinated from a central office in Tillsonburg.
Marketing regulations are established by the board before
each season. A grower must meet the requirements of these
regulations before his tobacco will be accepted at the auction
The first requirement, when preparing the crop for sale, is
that farmers must sort tobacco to remove green, red, dark or
nondescript leaves and package it into bales weighing approxi-
mately 55 pounds, wrapped in kraft paper, and marked on two
sides with kiln number and leaf color.
The farmer must notify the board when he has a quarter
of his crop prepared for market. The notices from farmers are
filed in the control office according to postmark date, and when
the market opens growers filing first get shipping order first.
Producers deliver their tobacco to the auction exchange
designated by the marketing board in five regular shipments as
First shipment, 10 percent of estimated weight of crop;
second, third and fourth shipments, 25 percent each; and fifth
shipment, 15 percent. The grower is notified several days in ad-
vance as to the specific day his shipment is to be received and
When the grower arrives at the exchange his tobacco is un-
loaded and classified. Bales are placed on pallets according to
classification, up to 30 bales per pallet. This makes up a sales
unit. The pallets are weighed and placed in rows on the display
floor, where they are graded by board graders, using one repre-
sentative bale for inspection. The board graders are followed by
government inspectors who make final checks of the grade.
After the tobacco has been graded the weight tickets of each
row of tobacco are carried, in order of display, to the office where
IBM operators catalogue the tobacco being offered for sale ac-
cording to position number, bill number, grade, number of bales
and total pounds. A catalogue is made for each row of pallets.
Each buying company is given copies of the catalog. Com-
pany officials then proceed to the display floor to inspect the
tobacco. As they do so they indicate on the catalog the amount
that the company is willing to pay for each unit of tobacco
The catalog is then carried to the company's buyer in the
auction room. He does the actual bidding. Usually the buyer
never sees the tobacco he is purchasing prior to the sale.
The mechanical auctioneer is a Dutch auction clock system.
An employee of the auction starts the clock at a figure five
to 15 cents above the price that the grade of tobacco has been
bringing. As the clock hand moves downward counter-clockwise,
the price decreases until such time as one of the buyers pushes
a button to stop the clock.
Each buyer is seated at a desk equipped with a button. When
he pushes the button and stops the clock, his identifying number
shows up on the clock board.
An attendant announces the number of the buyer and the
THE ONTARIO FLUE-CUIED
TOBACCO GKOWERS AUCTION EXCHANGE
Fronl of Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Auction Exchange. There
are three identical facilities located at Tillsonburg, Aylmer and Delhi.
A Canadian display floor with pallets containing up to 30 bales. Each row
is catalogued; then company officials inspect each pallet as shown
above, making notes of the price they would pay for each lot of in-
terest. This information is then sent to buyer in Dutch Clock Auction
Farmer's pack barn showing his crop already graded, baled and stacked
waiting for shipping orders from the Marketing Board. The symbols (3B)
seen on front of the bales indicate that it is the third curing and Bright
price bid for the unit. He does this over a loudspeaker so that
growers waiting in an adjoining room can keep informed about
After a row or a catalog of tobacco has received bids, the
farmer has 30 minutes to decide if he will accept or reject the
bids on his offerings.
When a bid is rejected the tobacco is moved to the re-code
area of the exchange where it is given a new weight bill and re-
offered for sale the same day. If the farmer rejects the second bid,
the tobacco must be taken home with the understanding it may-
be offered again with a future shipment.
Records of each farmer's sale in all three exhanges are for-
warded daily to the central office on IBM cards. There, checks
are made out by computer and mailed to growers the following
The auction sales begin at 9 o'clock each morning, Monday
through Friday, and generally close around 3 p.m. Daily offer-
ings in each exchange average around 850,000 pounds.
The number of units sold per day at each exchange ranges
between 1,500 and 1,750 the rate being approximately 6V2 units
offered per minute.
Each exchange employs about 200 people during the market-
ing season. The employees are paid wages ranging from $1.85
to $2.00 (Canadian currency) per hour.
Cost of Program
Where does the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Marketing
Board get the funds needed to provide facilities and operate all
phases of the tobacco program from production controls through
the marketing process?
The funds are provided through a one cent fee deducted from
the proceeds of the sale of each pound of tobacco.
Under the Ontario Farm Products Marketing Act, the board
is authorized to assess all licensed growers up to one cent per
pound on all tobacco marketed. This fee provides the marketing
board approximately $2 million a year in revenues which have
proven sufficient to provide the land, buildings and cover all
North Carolina Flue-Cured Crops
•Source: N. C. and USDA Crop Reporting Service.
••Preliminary for 1969. » „, ^ j i
Note: Since 1965, production is pounds produced and does not reflect pounds not
sold or pounds carried forward to tlie next season.
State Marketing Summary 1969-1970
Record high prices prevailed througliout the 1969 flue cured market
season. The average price paid growers for the entire flue-cured crop
was $72.13 per hundred pounds which is $5.66 per hundred pounds more
than the 1968 crop average. Such a price increase resulted primarily from
the improved quality produced by growers last year and a 3.6 percent
increase in support price. A large portion of the 1969 crop was composed
of the thin bodied leaf which is desired by companies in order to meet
present day domestic and foreign consumer market demands.
Volume increased slightly over 1968's low ebb but still did not match
the quantities produced during the early sixties. Quantity appears to be
restricted more by grower limitations than by poundage quota. Farmers
produced 87 million pounds less than their allotment in 1969.
Stabilization receipts for all flue-cured types decreased considerably
as compared to the 1968 crop even though price support increased. A
total of 9.2 percent of the 1969 producer sales went under government
loan whereas 12.9 percent of the 1968 crop went to stabilization. The only
area to show an increase in stabilization receipts for 1969 was the East-
Burley producers did not share in the prosperity experienced by
flue-cured growers during 1969. The burley crop was heavier than the
previous 1968 crop and was of a less desirable quality. Burley growers
received $5.23 less per hundred for the 1969 crop than for the 1968 crop.
TYPE 13: The Industry-Wide Flue- Cured Marketing Committee
recommended that the North Carolina Border Belt open its 1969 season
three sales days after the South Carolina opening. However, North Caro-
lina Border Belt warehousemen felt that their markets should open
simultaneously with South Carolina markets as was the usual custom. So,
with tobacco graders on hand under federal court order, N. C. Border
Belt markets attempted to open with S. C. markets on July 23, 1969.
But due to a lack of buying power, all markets closed after a few hours
of operation. Border markets then officially opened on July 28, 1969, with
full buying power, and some markets remained open until October 2,
Quality improved considerably over the 1968 crop especially in the
desirable colors. Offerings contained larger proportions of lemon and
orange grades and smaller quantities of immature and nondescript grades.
Prices advanced to a record high level for the 1969 season. Increases
of $2 to $7 occurred for straight grades of lemon and orange leaf while
immature and nondescript grades advanced $7 to $15 per hundred above
the 1968 season average. Farmers received an average of $72.71 which
surpassed the 1968 average by $5.32 per hundred pounds.
Total producer sales for the 1969 Border Belt market season were
118,033,542 pounds returning growers $85,823,627 as compared to the
1968 sales of 129,251,422 pounds returning $87,107,065.
TYPE 12: The Eastern Belt began its season a week earlier in 1969.
Eastern flue-cured markets opened August 19 and remained open in
some areas for 48 days. A few small markets began closing as early as
October 14 while larger markets continued operation tlirough Novem-
Quality of the 1969 offerings was superior to the 1968 crop. Much of
the marketings consisted of thin bodied mature leaf with less variegated
and nondescript being offered.
Prices achieved new records in the Eastern Belt during 1969. Average
prices for poor quaUty leaf increased $4 to $9 per hundred and good
quality smoking leaf, cutters and lugs increased $1 to $2 per hundred
above 1968's average. A large portion of the cutters and lugs failed to
average above their support price. However, the overall Eastern Belt
crop averaged $72.49 per hundred which is $4.83 per hundred greater than
the previous crop average.
Total producer sales the year were 313,475,282 pounds returning
growers $227,243,152 whereas 287,009,702 pounds returned farmers $194,-
193,390 in 1968.
TYPE IIB; Middle Belt markets held opening sales on September 2.
Some markets remained in operation for a period of 44 days, whereas
a few one-set markets closed their season as early as October 15.
Quality of 1969 Middle Belt offerings was far superior to the previous
crop. Due to a favorable growing season, an unusually large percent of
the offerings consisted of orange smoking leaf with less nondescript
and unripe variegated leaf being sold.
Prices advanced to a record level for the Middle Belt 1969 crop.
Increases of $1 to $5 per hundred occurred in cutters, lugs, primings,
smoking leaf and good quality leaf. Some leaf prices increased as much
as $6 to $11 per hundred. Average price increase for all grades was
$7.34 per hundred which raised the 1969 Middle Belt seasonal average to
$71.52 per hundred.
Gross producer sales for 1969 amounted to 111,647,113 pounds and
returned farmers $79,847,256, whereas 106,603,657 pounds brought farmers
$68,416,363 in 1968.
TYPE 11 A: Old Belt phased in flue-cured auctions on September 2
with nine sets of buyers — four of which were assigned to North Carolina.
Winston-Salem received two sets of buyers. Stoneville and Roxboro each
received one set of buyers. Other Old Belt markets opened September 16.
Yadkinville, the Old Belt's newest market closed October 30. Final
auctions for North Carolina flue-cured tobacco were held December 1 in
Winston-Salem giving Old Belt markets 52 sales days.
Quahty of 1969 Old Belt tobacco was exceptionally good. Offerings
consisted of a large percentage of cutters and smoking leaf and less un-
ripe variegated leaf.
Prices were congruent with other flue-cured belts in that record
breaking averages occun-ed throughout the season. Practically all grades
increased as much as $1 to $6 per hundred with some grades advancing
$6 to $22 per hundred pounds. N. C. Old Belt markets averaged $70.97 per
hundred pounds for the entire season which was a $7.06 per hundred
increase over 1968 crop returns.
See Marketing Summanj
CM tr- coco M I
c<f o .-T T-T ci CO CO crT
CD irf in CO CO •—* i^-"o'co cd'cm' cvf lO in cDaToT
COO-'^'COCOi:— OlTt^OCOCOt^CDtr--^.— <co
O^^CO OCT) O^O^CNl^CN ir- 01^0lTj<CDTj<Ir-cO
t> CO of !>•' oT .-H in CO cd' t-'co co't-" co" co'co"!:-"
^ -^ CO CO 1-H LO
t> -^ 1— I CO -^ 1— t O T
T-H a: '^ c- CO ^ 1-1 CO m
CO CO »— I CO CM C75 C
5? CO -^"in c-^oTinai'co'"
Ij CM ^ lO o -^ '"1,'^ °^^
jr CO [>^i>^'^"i>-'"'^'"c
CO eg CM CM
pq .— I .— ( CD CM lO t> CO c—
rj LtToOO C^'ctTcO CD in
CM 'Tt^ O CM TJH CM CD
t— O CO CD 02 in r~«
. — .. ^ ,,_,^-ui_>^iJujx.OCO'— tCOOiCO'^CM
in co"^ -rr o ^"o'^'cM i-H Th cvf fo'co'in o'cm'
t>_CM^O O-^OO CD in 1>-^CD 1— t CO I> CD CO '^ '^^'^
co*"CT5"o"arco cd'co o'ctTcji cjj tr^ a^ Oir-^co
J u_i -^3- "^j uj uj i-^ t-^i c^j 1— ' U3 u-i f-^j t— ' m (—
301LnC0OC0CDC-'C— Tt^O'— ICDCOCD-— *in
iT'-^'co -^"co in Tt^'c-* .-H ^"TtTo-C^io i^t-^ ,
g.— (.— (c-s i>-[>-CMCoinc^ .— ii-H,
oo in of in 05' ^ o c3i ctT in .-H ci co' CM in co' co
CM CO CO Tt^ in CO CO 05 CO ^ en 1-H ,-h 001
'— icoi-HCvicD-rt^cM.— ioinmoc35mmoi'^o
,-H CSJ C^i CM .-H CM CM .-H CM CM O CM .-* CM CM CO C^' cd
CTSCDi— <C— C-CDCOCO
CD^O^CM CO CM^CO Oi ^ ^<^ CTS CO C75_CM 05 '^ -— < O
in CO CO cfoi CO cd' CO o in in CO CD co'in in'o'cM
coco^cD^in.— '■'^cMc-1— icocM^-^-^inco
CO co" CO OS OS CM*" in oD cji" cd 00 cj:' c-' cd' oJ o c--"
.-I -^ CO CO t-i CO
° °S o^ fc^ > -5
F. <u c o.ti '^
t^ O ™
i^£ °|'^-a.2o^S H
■ [r-ioc^«— loooir-coco
CO CO o
D- lO 05
CO CO c<i
t- .— I '^S^ D- Oi lO
i:^ i-H CD LO CO (M
1 ^ CO
rco CO t~^ co"c
lOCMCM-— ti— ico01C50:iCD
CO c^ c^i o OS co^-^^os^-^^co
CO ■^'o'-^'oi ^.— I in CO CO
COCDC^'^CO'— ii— <uococo
lo -*' CO lo cjT co' CD -"^ c-"
C- (M CO
csi lo in
CDi— ICOtNCOCOCOi— iC<]CO
3 CS CO C~ CD CO CJl C-
^ O 0:1 (M ■— t CO CSl^-^^^CJ^^M
y cDCo 10 CO incD cdaTcD CO
(M t-«,-i 1-1
PC T— ( [^- -^ cq 0:1 ^^^^ '^ '^,'— 1
^ csrio"'-H CO .-T fM'co L— "c-'o'
t-'^COCDO:)'— "'— lOiCD^C^
o c<r c-" cd' oT CO co' 1-H 01 CO
Q C^ CD CD 1— < O <— < O '^ CD
^ '^cot-.— (lOincDcsicoco
A oicri.— <D-^cO'— I.— ii— lOo
in co'in csrir-"cD''^'ai'--^ in
.-H ^ CO CO CD «-H CM (M "M^^rl.
j'c-'cD Oi"co co'cm' cd cs] in
-^ -^ CM -^ CO CM
in o oi E^ CO "^ CO •— I CM
in CO CO [r- t^ CO CO Oi CD
J^ incM --H
*^-' CO CO --H
t\ en ■* en
*-* CD CSl CO
CM --< —I i-H
CD C- CD CD CM in C
T3 2 CO o ra cu-S H fs 0)
< u Q H fo III hJ O w ^
3 H H
> OJ 0)
Summary Of N. C. Dealer And
Warehouse Resales— 1969
Total Flue-Cured Resales 23,757,413
Total Burley Resales 1,710,076 1,150,820
Producer And Gross Sales Of Flue-Cured
Tobacco By States— 1969
Producer Sales Gross Sales
Slale Pounds Average Pounds Average
N. C 639,996,078 $72.13 663,753,491 $71.97
Va 127,529,479 71.81 131,764,478 71,68
S. C 136,794,060 72.80 143,330,127 72.69
Ga 126,325,847 73.23 133,877,856 73.12
Fla 20,389,892 74.45 22,266,739 74.39
Total 1,051,036,356 $72.36 1,094,992,691 $72.22
Flue-Cured Movement In And Out
Of North Carolina
N. C. Tobacco Sold
Out of Stale
Out of State Tobacco Sold in N. C.
Burley Tobacco Movement In And Out
Of North Carolina
N. C. Tobacco Sold Out of Slate
Out of State Tobacco Sold in N. C.
W. Va —
S. C —
Flue-Cured Stabilization Receipts
By Types And States— 1969
Producer Stabilization Percentage
Slate Typ5 Sales (lbs.) Receipts (lbs.) Stab. Received
Va. Total IIA
N. C IIA
N. C IIB
N. C 12
N. C 13
N. C. Total 11-13
S. C. Total 13
Ga. Total 14
Fla. Total 14
Total All Types
Burley Stabilization Receipts
For N. C. And Total U. S. -1969-70
Receipts (lbs.) Stab. Received
N. C 31 17,594,430 2,473,562 14.1
U. S. Total 31 580,800,875 158,660,468 27.3
N. C. Burley Tobacco Allotments*
Alleghany 552 218.00 9
Ashe 2,570 1,023.07 3
Avery 243 106.84 10
Brunswick 1 -09 ^^
Buncombe 2,858 1,333.57 2
Burke 14 4.47 21
Caldwell 19 6.65 20
Cherokee 190 66.91 14
Clay 224 83.34 12
Cleveland 8 3.09 22
Davidson 2 0.89 27
Gaston 1 0.50 28
Graham 661 285.14 8
GranviUe 1 0.12 30
Haywood 1,834 888.57 5
Henderson 108 41.18 16
Iredell 3 1.18 24
Jackson 274 102.74 11
McDowell 70 24.77 18
Macon 238 75.29 13
Madison 2,730 1,903.74 1
MitcheU 929 453.13 7
Polk 5 1.07 25
Rutherford 52 21.31 19
Stokes 2 0.34 29
Surry 7 0.94 26
Swain 202 65.60 15
Transylvania 72 26.70 17
Watauga 1.658 704.65 6
Wilkes 6 1.60 23
Yancey 1,724 943.60 4_
STATE TOTAL 17,258 8,389.09 1-31
•Source: USDA Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service.
CD CD D- Ol <X) CO £>
(X3 t~ 'R,'^ CO in CM O O:' ^^^ ^'~' COCOCDOiTjHrJHcOOSC-t— o^c
t-T ■^"t-'co c-'cD'oi"-^ r-^cToT cD'co'"^"^''i>-'"c^'"cD'"aroi"c<rc4""'
1-H CO ,— I -<:jH coco CM csi CD CO -— i o CO ^ c?5 CD c::i CM m
OS "^^ c^ '^^ ^ ^^ *^^ "^^ <^. °^^ ■^^ "^^ t^. t-^ ^„ <^ *^_ <^.
1-H co" ^ i-Tco o' in t-H t> lo oi"i> t> oTcm"
Oi t^ C^k ■
i-HCMcocomasc^osc^ir-cjiinoincMioinoiCMcoi— icot-c^inT— (CDcoinococ^cDinc
t-^ojc^'aicdaico ' '.-^oiTJ^coLnLnc6 'cgT-iin "cd^o'crJc-^cdcgo^cDr^ciLriaJO
in CM CD CO C3 o c^ ^ 1— I o CO -^ '^ CD cq ^ Oi c- c- co c^ cm co cs]inocoooe<
CO in ^ CD CD csi .— ( in i— i co cm -^ t— ( co in co cm cd co c: o co cm Tt^ co ^ .-h «
•^"i-T ctT^'i^co'" i-Tcd CO -^c^LO cO'-M-^'^coczTinaT r-To'cTTinc^
rHC^COOC-'^'— It— COt^CO'-H.— iin-^^OS-^CD C0_a5C0_C0_r-»C0C0C0C0'^O
CO t-^cg in oc-'o o t-^tr^co'co t~-^t— " cm'co co
in CO lO 05 as in o m t- <—( coco c^ o co
CMCD'^OI'^— -- ^ ^^_
CO 1-H co' CO i-H in
as' os' c-" co' co" co' in •^' -— T as' cm lO co" ir
in c^ ic CO CM c^ '^ coinoD-coc*
o^co^^co^co^cM^os^i-H CO osiers c:s co e
^'.-T co'^'co'in CD r-'aTi-rooc
CM — I r-( ^ ^ ^ c»
^cMi-H'^CTscTS'— i^ocoir-'^crsi>cococ^cDcM'^oincJSi:^CM'— io.-icoi>t>'-imt>
cMi-HCMco-^cMcd * 'cDcococTscM'-HO 'ocD'^' 'incdoirii^osc6coint-^-^-<:j^"c^
as CO i-H in CO CO in
t^ 0_CO CD in CJS CD
co' T-T c-" ■<:**' in csT
in CO o in r- as CO CO m ^ . , _,
CM CSl CO O CD CM t> T-< I>- CM CO CO .
CM C^'CMCTS'CO'OS" — '-'- " -^
cocoir-cocMc-in.-HT-HcocMt-tr-cMcocO'— I.— icOTf^.-Hir-int^cMO^'*!— ic-CDCMi-Hinc
"scsiinascD-^c-oocooin.— lOr- ir^-o-^cocDOin.— f-^coc3ii>cMOrHCMin.-«ioe
""" " C^ICOCTSOi— ic— <
<^ d^-S 5 5
■c oJ fe Li •
> c o to
^-ji-Q i-<r-c "J--^ C'*-' ^ cd '^
^^ a S oJ ™ 2 3ra M ffl rt c3 ra55;i! o K 3 ffl oj ca D 3-5-3 u « «i , ^.^
H cd" OD Co" CD CST i-H of CtT oT lo" t-T LO -^' CO lO CO O" O CO cm' Cd" D-' ^ O' C-" 1-H ^^ CN ^ CO
— u.,w. ^^^^. ^ ^.-Ic-icoc^'coLnOLOcocsjcocDOco-— ii— icsii:-o:.c<icDa^
'cococo.— tLOCDco-— t<or-<M(Mrj^^c>ocococ-gco .-H_in o co^cnjcd^lo c^i-h c3 co co^'^^^o ir~^
cic-f --H oT-^'cO^oicO --H 'T^^'^lO lO CO 1-H CO* cdc^' CO (N'" of (M" CO '-' o'oTcO t>-'lO CM -— t coir-
■< (M CD 1-4 LO CD 1— ( C— CO LO -^ in
■ CO CO C- ^ CSi '^ i-( ^ 05
COCJim-^CD COUOCOOi a3_-^_^CD^C<J_-^_^cri_C-^C73_
: ,-4" ^' ^ i>r o
OD"^-— I'^COCTjCOtM-^D^ "^i— <•rJ^LOOCOI
.—ICO CO '-I CM .-H .— I .— I CM
^LOCOi— ICOCOCDt-'— <lO-^CT5iOC00:0:!'^C0CDCDCDC
CM --H '
lO 1— I r-H .-I rHC^
•^COmo: CM[r-a5COCOC^CDCDCX)C^05_ ^^"^ ^'R,'^^^'^^^ '-^^'^ ""l.^
,-4',-H"cM"'-r -^CM lO c^'corHcoi-T CO csTcM
[>COO.— I.— iCJ^JD-Omt-TtiCMiOCDCOCMt^l
OTt^OCDOSCDI ~ '" "
CO t- CO CO CO eg c
North Carolina Burley Crops
•Source: N. C. and USDA Crop Reporting Service.
••Preliminary for 1969.
State Marketing Summary 1969-1970
(Continued from page 15)
Gross 1969 producer sales for the Old Belt totaled 96,840,141 pounds
bringing farmers $68,725,701 compared with 1968 when 84,508,739 pounds
sold for $54,011,509.
TYPE 31: North Carolina Bur ley markets began auctions November
24 and continued operation for 21 sales days. The three North Carolina
markets — AsheviUe, Boone and West Jefferson closed January 15.
Burley markets failed to maintain the record breaking price trend
established by flue-cured markets during 1969. Prices declined $2 to $10
per hundred in most grades with the greatest decrease occurring in low
quality heavy bodied grades. Some choice and fine grades of lugs and
flyings had a $1 per hundred increase in support price which resulted
in a $1 per hundred higher average for those particular grades.
Price decline in the Burley Belt was associated with crop quality.
QuaUty of the 1969 Burley offerings was inferior to the 1968 crop. The
1969 marketings contained a much larger amount of red and green heavy
leaf and smaller amounts of medium to thin bodied tan leaf.
Gross producer sales for North Carolina Burley markets totaled
17,594,430 pounds averaging $68.31 per hundred pounds, returning farm-
ers $12,018,269 as compared to the 1968 crop of 16,436,486 pounds that sold
for $12,087,992 and averaged $73.54 per hundred pounds.
North Carolina Tobacco Warehouses And Operators
By Belts And Markets — 1969
Chadbourn (one set buyers)
Jimmy Green Whse. — Jimmy Green
Producers — Jack W. Garrett, Crickett Garrett
Clarkton (one set buyers)
New Clarkton— Maynard Talley, Cecil Hartley
Bright Leaf — Jimmy Green
Fair Bluff (one set buyers)
Powell— A. H. Powell, B. A. Powell
Riverside — Aaron Parrish, Cliff Stephens
Planters — Randolph Currin, B. W. Currin, C. W. Shaw, S. Lawrence,
H. E. and H. B. Dunn
Fairmont (four sets buyers)
Chambers, Leggett & Garrett — E. J. Chambers, Leggett & Garrett Co.
Davis-Mitchell-Planters — Harry Mitchell, Jack Mitchell, G. F.
Roy star, Daniel Morris, Major Meadows, W. L. Gregory
Holliday-Frye— E. H. Frye, J. W. & J. M. Holliday
Square Deal— W. G. Bassett, C. L. Smith
Star Carolina— W. M. Puckett, A. M. Best
Liberty Twin States— P. R. Floyd, Jr., R. J. Harris, Bill Sheets,
Big Brick— A. W. McDaniel, A. D. Lewis, Jr.
Fayetteville (one set buyers)
Big Farmers— P. L. Campbell, A. R. Talley, Sr., A. R. Talley, Jr., Don
Planters — Joe W. Stephenson, J. C. Adams
Lumberton (three sets buyers)
Carolina — J. L. Townsend, Sr. & Jr., J. E. Johnson, Jr., Sam Dunn
Smith-Dixie — Cecil Thompson, Leslie Hall, Jack Pate
Hedgpeth— R. A. Hedgpeth, E. H. Collins, Albert Thornton
Liberty — H. D. Goode, R. H. Livermore, Frank White
Star — D. T. Stephenson, Hogan Teater, Russell Teater
Cooperative — C. E. McLaurin, Mgr.
Tabor City (one set buyers)
R. C. Coleman Co.— R. C. Coleman, Sr., Mrs. Harriet Sikes
Planters — Don Watson, Mgr.
Whiteville (three sets buyers)
Gray & Neal— A. Dial Gray, J. L. Neal
Crutchfield— G. E. & R. W. Crutchfield
Lea's Big Dixie — Wm. Townes Lea, Louie Love
Liberty— J. W. Hooks, I. A. Barefoot & Sons
Moore's— C. C. Mason, C. F. Jeffcoat
Nelson's — John H. Nelson, Jim Smith
Planters— A. O. King, Jr., Cliff Stephens
Smith's — Ernest Smith, Joe T. Smith
Ahoskie (one set buyers)
Basnight No. 1-2-3— L. L. Wilkens, Sr. & Jr.. H. G. Veazey, H. Jenkins
Farmers 1 & 2— W. M. Odoms, Pierce & Winborne, J. L. Morris
Clinlon (one set buyers)
Carolina— L. D. Herring, C. J. Strickland, N. L. Daughtry
Ross — Clarence Kirven, Jr., W. K. Beech
Dunn — (one set buyers)
Planters— Leland Lee, J. M. Smothers
Big Four Whse. — Tom Smothers, Jack Calhoun, Norman Hardee
Farmville (two sets buyers)
Bell's— R. A. Bell & Bros.
Fountain & Monk No. 1— John F. Fountain, J. I. Oakley
Fountain & Monk No. 2 — John F. Fountain, J. I. Oakley
Planters & Prewits — Chester Worthington, W." O. Newell, B. S.
Lee's — Gordon Lee
Goldsboro (one set buyers)
Carolina— S. G. Best, D. V. Smith, D. Price
Farmers — Robert Lynch
Big Brick — J. R. Musgrave
Victory — Richard Gray, Clarence Whitley
Greenville (five sets buyers)
Cannon's — W. T. Cannon, Carlton Dail
Farmers— W. Arthur Tripp, T. P. Thompson, Harold Watson,
Star-Planters— B. B. Sugg, Harding Sugg
Keel— J. A. & J. B. Worthington, Fenner Allen
New Independent — Bob CuUifer, Tom Andrews, Jr.
Raynor-Forbes-Clark — Noah Raynor, A. A. Forbes, Billy Clark
Harris-Rogers — R. E. Rogers
New Carolina — Laddie Avery, Larry Hudson
Kinston (four sets buyers)
Farmers — John Jenkins, Sr. & Jr.
Knott's 1 & 2 — Graham Knott, Billy Brewer
New Dixie — John Jenkins, Sr. & Jr., Lee Jenkins
New Central — Bill Herring, Bill King
H & H — Dempsey Hodges, Virgil Harper
Banner — John Heath, Kirby Loftin
Brooks — Roger & Fred Brooks
Central— Bill Herring, BiU King
Robersonville (one set buyers)
Grays-Red Front-Central— J. H. Gray, Jack Sharpe, C. R. Gray,
James E. Gray
Planters — H. T. Highsmith, E. G. Anderson, Frank Everett, H. H.
Rocky Mount (four sets buyers)
Cobb & Carlton— W. E. Cobb, Jr. & J. C. Carlton
Mangum — Roy M. Phipps
Planters — S. S. Edmondson
Smith's — James D. Smith, Sr. & Jr.
Works— R. J. Works, Jr., A. B. Raynor
Peoples — Guy Barnes, Gene Simmons, James Walker
Farmers — J. Holt Evans, Joe W. Coleman
Fenners — J. B. Fenner
Smithfield (two sets buyers)
Farmers-Stephenson Riverside — Gilbert Stephenson, N. L. Daughtry,
Big Planters — Joe Stephenson, Jerry Stephenson, Frank B. Skinner
Gold Leaf— R. A. Pearce, Sr. & Jr.
Wallace — Lawrence, Bobby & Larry Wallace
Tarboro (one set buyers)
Clark 1 & 2— J. F. Wilson, Jr. & R. L. Dunn
Farmers 1 — Walter Walker
Farmers 2 — Walter Walker
Victory — W. V. Leggett
Wallace (one set buyers)
Blanchard & Farrior — O. C. Blanchard, W. H. Farrier, R. H. Lanier
Hussey — Joe Bryant
Sheffield's— John Sheffield, Homer M. Boney, Jr.
Farmers — H. G. Perry
Washington (one set buyers)
Sermon's — W. J. Sermon, Harry L. Roberts
Talley— W. G. Talley
Hassell — Malcolm P. Hassell
Wendell (one set buyers)
Liberty-Farmers — H. H. & Berdon Eddins
Northside — Graham Dean, Bill Sanders
Banner — C. P. (Pete) Southerland
Williamston (one set buyers)
Rogers — Urbin Rogers, Leland Barnhill, Russell Rogers
New Dixie — C. Fisher Harris, J. Elmo Lilley
Wilson (five sets buyers)
Big Dixie — W. C. Thompson, Buck Edmondson
Wainwright — George L. Wainwright, Sr. & Jr.
Centre Brick— S. M. Cozart, W. H. Cozart HI, F. M, Eagles
Growers Cooperative — Clifford Aycock, Mgr.
New Planters— W. C. Smith, R. T." Smith, Jr.
Smith — S. Grady Deans, John F. Deans
Bob's & Clark's- C. R. Clark
Liberty— C. B. Renfro
Windsor (one set buyers)
Planters 1 & 2— C. B. & B. U. Griffin, Dave Newsome
Farmers — Bill Davis, Norman Swain
Vanceboro (Direct Buying Station)
Cleve's Buying Station — Bill Cleves
Aberdeen (one set buyers)
New Aberdeen— Cecil Moore, J. T. Worthington, Bobby Oldham
Planters — W. Fentriss Phillips
Hardee's— Hugh T. Hardee
Farmers — William Maurer
Carthage (one set buyers)
McConnells— E. C. Layton, Earl J. Ennis
Victory — E. C. Layton, Earl J. Ennis
New Farmers— Bill Carter, Sr. & Jr.
Durham (three sets buyers)
Liberty— Wallcer Stone, Sr. & Jr.
Roycroft-Mangum— J. K. Roycroft, Randolph Currm, J. Cumn, Jr.
Star— W. W. Cozart, W. L. Currin, A. L. Carver
Farmers-Planters— J. M. Talley, Bob Dale, Sam Mangum
EUerbe (one set buyers)
Farmers — Guy Sutton
Ellerbe Whse. — Noble Wilson
Richmond County— W. H. Rummage, Ashton Richardson, J. R.
Fuquay-Varina (two sets buyers)
New Deal— Dan Talley, Dan Brisson, Arthur Talley
Gold Leaf— J. W. Dale, Waverly Aiken
Carolina— C. E. Knott, E. E. Clayton
Roberts — Joe Roberts
Henderson (two sets buyers)
Moore's Big Banner— A. H. Moore, C. E. Jeffcoat
Carolina— J. S. Royster, F. J. Jackson
Farmers — W. J. Alston, Jr., Dave Bowling
High Price— C. B. Turner, R. E. Tanner, R. E. Fleming, S. P. Flemmg
Liberty 1 & 2— George T. Robertson, S. E. Southerland
Ellington— F. H. Ellington & John Ellington
Alston's— W. J. Alston, Jr., Dave Bowling
Big Dollar— M. L. Hight, James H. O'Brien
Louisburg (one set buyers)
Big Franklin— S. T. & H. B. CottreU
Ford's — Charlie Ford
Friendly Four — James Speed, Gus McGhee
Oxford (two sets buyers)
Banner-Mitchell — David Mitchell
Fleming 1 & 2— D. T. Currin, Sr. & Jr., F. O. Finch
Farmers-Mangum — Julian Adcock, S. B. Knott
Johnson-High Price— C. R. Watkins, C. R. Watkins, Jr., T. J. Currm,
J. C. Hamme
Owen 1 & 2— W. L. Gregory, G. P. Royster, M. A. Goode, Sam W.
Watkins, John S. Watkins, Jr., C. B. Wilkins
Yeargin-Granville— R. W. Crews, W. W. Yeargin
Sanford (one set buyers)
Twin City— W. M. Carter, T. W. Mansfield, Jimmy Mansfield
Morgan's — Jimmy Morgan
Castleberry's— C. N. CastlebeiTy, Jr., R. F. Castleberry
Warrenton (one set buyers)
Boyd's — B. W. Currin, Jr.
Centre— M. P. Carroll, E. W. Radford, E. M. Moody
Farmers — E. G. Tarwater
Thompson — C. E. Thompson, M. P. Edwards, Jr.
Currin's 1 & 2— C. W. Currin
Burlington (one set buyers)
Carolina — H. L. Perkins
Coble — N. C. Newman, Joe Robertson
Farmers — Bill McCauley, Glenn McCray
Greensboro (one set buyers)
Greensboro Tob. Whse. Co. — R. C. Coleman, Jr., Mgr.
Guilford Tob. Whse.— J. R. & J. E. Pell
Madison (one set buyers)
New Brick — S. F. Webster, Lloyd Webster
Carolina — S. F. Webster, Lee McCollum
Sharpe & Smith Farmers— W. S. Smith, D. C. Hoilman
Mebane (one set buyers)
Farmers — Jule Allen, Bill Allen
Piedmont — Billy Hopkins, Jimmy Hopkins
Mt. Airy (one set buyers)
New Farmers — Tom Jones, O. L. Badgett, Boyd Cain, F. V.
Dixie— W. H. Brown, H. Y. Hodges, Fred E. Chilton
Hunter's— J. W. Hunter, W. R. Fowler
Reidsville (one set buyers)
New Farmers — G. E. Smith, Steve Smith, P. D. McMichael,
Leader-Smothers — A. P. Sands, Tom Kimbro, T. G. Smothers,
Roxboro (one set buyers)
Farmers — Lindsay Wagstaff, R. A. Hester
Hyco — F. J. Hester, Jr.
Foacre — H. W. Winstead, Jr., Pres.
Planters Whse. #2— T. O. Pass, Sr. & Jr.
Pioneer — Elmo Mitchell, Roy Carver
Stoneville (one set buyers)
Joyce's — O. P. Joyce, W. R. Joyce
Farmers-Piedmont — R. N. Linville, Clarence Peeples, W. Q. Chilton,
Robert & Garland Rakestraw
Winston-Salem (four sets buyers)
Carolina-Star — R. W. Newsome, W. B. Simpson, H. M. Bouldin
Growers— W. G. Sheets, Joe Pell, C. R. Harris, R. J. Harris
Pepper's — C. F. Hutchins, Joe Cook, Homer Dearmin
Taylor — Mrs. Paris Pepper, L. E. Pope
Big Winston — Taylor Carter & Jack Carter
Cook's — B. E. Cook, Claude Strickland, Jr., P. Thomas
Planters — Paul Draughn, Roger L. Nichols, F. Smithdeal
Yadkinville (full buying power not represented)
Millers Tob. Whse. — R. A. Owen, Anderson Miller
Asheville (two sets buyers)
Dixie-Burley — R. A. Owen
Planters — J. W. Stewart
Walker Warehouse — James E. Walker
Day's — Charlie Day
Boone (one set buyers)
Mountain Burley — Joe E. Coleman
West Jefferson (one set buyers)
Tri-State Burley— Rex Taylor
Farmers Burley — Mrs. Tom Faulkner
STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE
James A. Gbaham, Commissioner
J. Atwell Alexander Stony Point
Fred N. Colvard Jefferson
Guy E. Fisher Pendleton
Claxtoe T. Hall Roxboro
George P. Kittrell Corapeake
Charles F. Phillips Thomasville
J. H. Poole West End
Henry Gray Shelton Speed
James L. Sutherland Laurinburg
David Townsend, Jr Rowland
DOMESTIC TAX PAID CIGARETTE CONSUMPTION
BY KINDS 1969
Total Domestic Consumption
520 Billion Cigarettes